Relations among dimensions of self-attribution, dimensions of self-concept, and academic achievements.

Replicated an earlier study by the present author and colleagues (see record 1984-14773-001) on self-attribution and dimensions of self-concept. 559 Australian 5th graders were assessed for (1) multiple dimensions of self-attribution for causes of academic outcomes, (2) multiple dimensions of self-concept, (3) multiple dimensions of inferred self-concept (by teachers and peers), and (4) achievements in reading and mathematics. Results show that the empirically derived dimensions of academic self-attribution yielded findings similar to the earlier study—no bipolar dimensions (e.g., internal–external) were found. Ss who attributed failure to lack of ability or lack of effort were found to have (1) better academic self-concepts (based on self-reports and teacher and peer inferences) and (2) better academic achievement (based on test scores and teacher ratings). (51 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Affect-generating powers of effort and ability self attributions of academic success and failure.

Studied (a) the affect productivity of effort and (b) the ability self-attributions of success or failure. Three experiments collectively involving 315 college students were run wherein Ss had to indicate for either hypothetical academic success or failure the effort–ability attribution that would generate in them the greatest affect. Relative to those in effort, attributions to ability generated as much happiness, but less pride, in the case of success and more unhappiness, but less shame, in the case of failure. It is concluded that ability attributions have a greater affective impact when morally neutral affects (e.g., happiness and unhappiness), as opposed to morally unneutral affects (e.g., pride and shame), are involved. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Causal attributions, causal dimensions, and affective reactions to success and failure.

Evaluated, in 2 studies, which of 3 theoretical models best describes the interrelations of causal attributions, causal dimensions, and affective reactions to success and failure. Study 1 used an experimental methodology requiring 99 undergraduates to imagine themselves in different achievement situations, whereas Study 2 involved the investigation of the affective reactions of 161 undergraduates to performance on a midterm examination. Results indicate that causal attributions and causal dimensions had joint and independent effects on affective reactions to success and failure. Implications for a theoretical model of the relation between attribution processes and affect are discussed. (22 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Measuring causal attributions for success and failure: A comparison of methodologies for assessing causal dimensions.

This study evaluated the reliability and validity of three commonly used procedures for assessing the dimensional properties of causal attributions for success and failure. These methods of assessment were based on open-ended attributions for performance, importance ratings of different causes of success and failure, and the attributor's perception of his or her causal attribution for performance as assessed by the Causal Dimension Scale. Data were collected on causal attributions, expected and actual performance, subjective evaluations of performance, and affective reactions from a group of students before and after their midterm examination. Analyses were conducted to evaluate the reliability, convergent and discriminant validity, and construct validity of the attribution measures. The results generally supported the use of the Causal Dimension Scale over the other methods of assessing causal dimensions. Implications of these findings for attribution research and possible improvements in the Causal Dimension Scale are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Impact of causal attributions on affective reactions to success and failure.

Assessed the impact of outcome (success vs failure) and attribution (internal vs external) on affect in an achievement setting. Following the theorizing of B. Weiner et al (1978, 1979), it was anticipated that the outcome manipulation would determine general positive and negative affective reactions, whereas the attribution manipulation would influence affects related to self-esteem. 53 female undergraduates received success or failure feedback on a social accuracy test and were induced to attribute their performance to either an internal (ability) or an external cause (characteristics of the task). A factor analysis revealed 3 dimensions: Negative Affect, Positive Affect, and Self-Esteem. ANOVA indicated that the nature of the attribution influenced all 3 forms of affective reactions. Success produced greater positive affect, less negative affect, and higher self-esteem than failure only when ability attributions were induced. Although additional analyses offered some support for the presence of affects influenced solely by outcome, the majority of analyses supported the notion that attributions are the primary determinants of affective reactions to success and failure. (24 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The cognition–emotion process in achievement-related contexts.

Two experiments examined the linkages between cognitions and emotions. In the 1st investigation, 79 undergraduates reported a "critical incident," in which they succeeded or failed an exam for a particular reason (e.g., help from others, lack of long-term effort). They then recounted 3 affects that were experienced. The data reveal prevalent affects linked with success and failure regardless of the attribution for the outcome. Many emotions identified were associated with specific attributions (e.g., luck–surprise; others–gratitude and others–anger); dimensions of causal attributions, such as locus, also influenced recollected feeling states, particularly esteem-related emotions. It is proposed that in achievement-related contexts there are 3 sources of affect elicited by disparate cognitions. The 2nd experiment demonstrated that 48 undergraduates used emotional cues to infer why a success or a failure had occurred. The proposed cognition–emotion and emotion–cognition couplings appeared to be symmetrical. (13 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Attribution processes in distressed and nondistressed couples: IV. Self–partner attribution differences.

The importance of the self–other distinction for understanding the relation between attributions and marital satisfaction is examined in two studies. In Study 1, causal attributions for naturally occurring behavior by the self and spouse were investigated. Study 2 examined both causal and responsibility attributions for hypothetical behaviors. In both studies, the attributions of spouses seeking therapy were investigated in relation to those of happily married persons in the community. The results showed that self–other attribution differences varied as a function of marital distress. Nondistressed spouses showed a positive attribution bias by making more benign attributions for partner behavior as opposed to self-behavior, whereas distressed spouses showed a negative attribution bias by making less benign attributions for partner behavior than for self-behavior. These findings suggest that self-attributions may, in part, determine the impact of attributions for spouse behavior on marital satisfaction. The clinical relevance of the results and their implications for research on actor–observer attribution differences are outlined. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Self-serving effect (bias?) in academic attributions: Its relation to academic achievement and self-concept.

Related the size of the self-serving effect (SSE), the tendency to accept responsibility for one's successes but not one's failures, for academic self-attributions to other academic constructs in 3 studies, 2 with 5th graders (226 and 559 Ss) and 1 with 122 9th graders. Ss completed an attribution scale and a self-concept measure, and reading achievement was assessed for 5th graders. Results from the 3 studies demonstrate that the size of the SSE was larger for (a) attributions to ability and effort than those to external causes, (b) more able students, (c) students with higher academic self-concepts, (d) students inferred to have higher academic self-concepts by teachers and by peers, and, perhaps, (e) younger students. SSEs for outcomes in mathematics and reading, particularly for attributions to ability, were content specific. The content specificity of the SSE and this logical pattern of relations among the SSEs and other variables suggest that academic achievement and academic self-concept are nonmotivational influences on the SSE. (42 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Children's causal attributions for success and failure in achievement settings: A meta-analysis.

Conducted a meta-analysis of 25 studies (1972–1981 [appended]) on children's attributions for success and failure to test the adequacy of the egotistic bias hypothesis (that attributions are more internal for success and more external for failure) for children in Grades 1–7. Variations in the wording of attributional questions and the research context were also included as factors in the meta-analysis. Results provide support for the egotism hypothesis and indicate that both question wording and research context are important determinants of children's attributions. In general, the egotism effect was supported more for informational than for the more traditional causal wording of the attribution questions. No effects were found for grade level. (47 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Naturally acquired learned helplessness: The relationship of school failure to achievement behavior, attributions, and self-concept.

Monitored personality and behavioral consequences of learned helplessness in children who had experienced extensive failure in school. Controlling for sex, race, age, and IQ, 3 groups of 20 9–12 yr old males (failing, average, and remedial) performed an experimental task and responded to questionnaires on self-concept and attributions for success and failure. To compare the predictive quality of learned helplessness theory with that of value expectancy theories, Ss were assigned to 1 of 2 reinforcement conditions (prediction of academic success and this prediction plus monetary reward) on a maze task. As predicted by value expectancy theories, failing Ss were significantly more persistent in the monetary reward condition than in the prediction of academic success condition. In agreement with learned helplessness theory, low self-concept was predicted independently and significantly by school failure, internal attributions for failure, and external attributions for success. (20 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Self-awareness, probability of improvement, and the self-serving bias.

Evidence for the self-serving bias (attributing success internally and failure externally) is inconsistent. Although internal success attributions are consistently found, researchers find both internal and external attributions for failure. The authors explain these disparate effects by considering the intersection of 2 systems, a system comparing self against standards and a causal attribution system. It was predicted that success and failure attributions are moderated by self-awareness and by the ability to improve. When self-focus is high (a) success is attributed internally, (b) failure is attributed internally when people can improve, (c) failure is attributed externally when people cannot improve, and (d) these attributions affect state self-esteem. Implications for the self-serving bias are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Dynamics of the attribution process.

Determined whether attributions made by 11 sportswriters for success or failure and for expected or unexpected outcomes of 16 games of 11 teams of the National Football League would change over time and over repeated observations. Hometown newspaper articles were coded by 12 trained undergraduates. Data showed that situational factors that led to differences in the type (locus and stability) of attributions being made decreased in strength with the passage of time and with repeated observations, but factors that motivated the attribution process may have increased with time. A causal model analysis showed some evidence that consistency forces affected the attribution process, but only after a prior win. The causal model also suggested that internal attributions for the outcome of a prior game predicted a team's doing better than expected in the subsequent game. (25 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of attributions for success on the alleviation of learned helplessness and depression.

Investigated the effects of attributions for success on the alleviation of mood and performance deficits of 104 19–60 yr old clinically depressed inpatients. Ss were assigned to either an acutely depressed group or an improved depressed group that was exposed to a learned helplessness induction procedure. Ss received 80% positive feedback on a task allegedly measuring social intelligence. Concurrently, Ss were exposed to experimental manipulations designed to induce attributions of this experience to 1 of 4 types of causes (internal–general, internal–specific, external–general, external–specific). Following this task, Ss' mood, expectancies, and anagram performance were assessed. Results indicate that helpless and depressed Ss who received the internal attribution manipulations reported less depressed mood than Ss in the external attribution conditions. Similarly, Ss in the general attribution conditions performed better and reported higher expectancies for success on the anagrams than Ss in the specific attribution conditions. Results are supportive of an attribution theory model of learned helplessness and depression. (27 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Attributions in the sports pages.

Extended the generality of attribution research by exploring several important issues in a highly involving real-world setting in which attributions naturally occur: athletic competition. 107 newspaper accounts of baseball and football games were coded for attributional content. These data support a motivational or self-enhancement explanation for the tendency to make internal attributions for success and external attributions for failure. No support was found for D. T. Miller and M. Ross's (1975) contention that this tendency is mediated by expectancies. It was also found that more attributions were made after unexpected, as opposed to expected, outcomes. There was a tendency for relatively more stable attributions to be given after expected outcomes. The advantages and disadvantages of studying attributions in archival data and the possibility of attributions justifying rather than explaining behavior are discussed. (25 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Expectations, aspirations, and evaluations as influenced by another's attributions for success and failure.

A study with 80 male and female students aged 16–18 yrs examined the effects of another's attributions for performance on one's own expectations, aspirations, and evaluations of performance. Ss witnessed an other (O) who had attributed his (or her) performance (successful or unsuccessful) on an anagram task to luck, task ease or difficulty, effort, or ability. When O had succeeded, Ss expected to perform best if O had attributed his success to the task (rather than to luck, effort, or ability); when O had failed, Ss expected to perform worst when O had attributed his failure to the task. In addition, Ss witnessing a successful O were more hopeful if O had made a task attribution, but Ss witnessing an unsuccessful O were more hopeful if O had made an effort attribution. Finally, Ss showed a tendency to attribute their own performance to the same cause to which O had attributed his own performance. Results are discussed in relation to the stability–instability and internal–external dimensions of causal attributions and to the need to perceive oneself as exercising effective control over the environment. (French summary) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The Causal Dimension Scale: A measure of how individuals perceive causes.

A shortcoming of previous attribution research has been the assumption that researchers can accurately translate causal attributions into causal dimensions. Attributional statements are often ambiguous and even when clearly stated may be perceived quite differently by the attributor and the researcher. The studies reported describe the development of the Causal Dimension Scale, a measure designed to assess how the attributor perceives the causes he or she has stated for an event. This scale assesses causal perceptions in terms of the locus of causality, stability, and controllability dimensions described by B. Weiner (1979). Two studies (288 undergraduates) tested the reliability and validity of the Causal Dimension Scale. All 3 subscales were found to be reliable and valid, and a 3-mode factor analysis confirmed the 3-dimensional structure of the scale. Results also indicate differences in the perception of causes of success and failure, with attributions for success being perceived as more internal, stable, and controllable than attributions for failure. The relationship between the Causal Dimension Scale and other attribution measures (such as locus of control or "attributional style" measures) is discussed. (16 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Attributions of learning disabled children.

Two studies compared learning disabled (LD) and normally achieving (NA) children's attribution patterns of success and failure in achievement and in social situations. In Study 1, 37 LD and 67 NA 7th and 8th graders were interviewed about attributions for hypothetical success–failure situations. 75 LD and 30 NA Ss (aged 9–17 yrs) from private schools were interviewed about attributions for real-life ratings of success in Study 2. NA Ss in both studies followed the expected pattern of attributing success more internally and failure (or less success) more externally. LD Ss attributed success to internal factors as well, but in both studies they also externalized success more than did the NA Ss. In their attributions for failure (or less success), the LD Ss in both studies did not follow the expected pattern. It is concluded that attributional differences between the LD Ss may reflect differences in self-esteem, expectations, and uncertainty. Careful reconsideration of the potentially negative consequences of attributional retraining of children with learning problems is recommended. (18 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Measuring causal attibutions for success and failure.

A great deal of research has been generated by the B. Weiner et al (1971) attribution model of achievement behavior. Although generally supportive of the model, the literature is marred by a lack of concern with the reliability and validity of the measurements used. In the present study, causal attributions for a manipulated success–failure event were collected from 252 college students on 5 measuring instruments. Results indicate that the open-ended response measure showed poorer interest correlation validity than did the structured measures. Rating scales showed a better fit to attribution conceptualizations than did the percentage method. Overall, scale measures seem to be the method of choice, although possible uses for open-ended measures of attributions are suggested. (24 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Sex differences in learned helplessness: IV. An experimental and naturalistic study of failure generalization and its mediators.

Tested the hypothesis that attributions for failure can mediate the generalization of failure effects across situations: When perceived causal factors remain present in otherwise novel situations, failure effects should transfer; when perceived causal factors are removed, failure effects should be attenuated. Specifically, it was predicted that sex differences in attributions would result in differential transfer to novel situations, with boys showing greater recovery of success expectancies when the evaluator changes, but girls showing greater recovery of success when the ability areas change. Two studies are reported: one a field study (40 female and 40 male 5th graders) examining changes in expectancy of academic success over the school year, and the other a laboratory analog (171 female and 143 male 4th–6th graders) examining directly the effects of evaluator and task change. Results provide strong support for the hypothesis and suggest an explanation for sex differences in long-term academic achievement. (14 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Praise or blame? Affective influences on attributions for achievement.

Three experiments showed that mood influences achievement attributions and that cognitive processes underlie these effects. In Experiment 1, happy Ss made more internal and stable attributions for success than failure in typical 'life dilemmas.' In Experiment 2, attributions for real-life exam performance were more internal and stable in a happy than in a sad mood. Dysphoric moods resulted in self-critical rather than self-enhancing attributions, contrary to motivational theories, but consistent with cognitive models and the clinical literature on depression. In Experiment 3 this pattern was repeated with direct self vs. other comparisons, and for self-efficacy judgments. The results are interpreted as supporting cognitive rather than motivational theories of attribution biases. The implications of the results for clinical research, and contemporary affect–cognition theories are considered. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)